China is actually quite independent from the US, and we have recent conclusive proof of that when Trump tried doing a trade war. Turns out, exports to the US are a tiny part of Chinese economy now. And I don’t know why you think China needs microchips from Taiwan when they have chip production entirely on the mainland. I think you need to spend a bit of time to actually research this subject because you’re very much misinformed here. https://www.huawei.com/...

Comrade, this symposium was held in May, and the topic discussed was "A New Path for the Development of the Semiconductor Industry in Practice."

The key phrase was "New Path."

This is from open sources:

"Taiwan produces significantly better and more technologically advanced chips than mainland China. The island is home to TSMC, which controls over 90% of the global market for the most advanced and commercially successful chips. China is rapidly closing the gap and dominating other segments, but Taiwan still retains technological leadership. What is the difference between chip production in Taiwan and China? Technological level: Taiwan mass-produces the most advanced processors using process technologies of 3 nanometers (nm) and below for Apple, Nvidia, and AMD. China (represented by SMIC) has struggled to master 7-nm and 5-nm processes, which are more expensive to produce and have a much higher defect rate. Access to equipment: Taiwan has free access to unique ultra-hard ultraviolet (EUV) lithography scanners from the Dutch company ASML. Sales of such machines to China are completely blocked due to US sanctions, which is hindering its development. Development. Advanced chip production: Taiwan holds an absolute monopoly on processors for artificial intelligence, data centers, and flagship smartphones."

China does not yet have the technology to overtake Taiwan.

https://mskgazeta.ru/...

by the way https://xcancel.com/...

Yes, but Margarita Simonyan is Solovyov, only in a skirt. As they say in the West, she's a mouthpiece for the Kremlin...))) They won't say anything bad about China on official Russian channels close to the Kremlin, I can tell you for sure – it's taboo! They say the same things about China there that they say here.

They're all raving about China these days.

Read it here

https://alfabank.ru/...

I don’t think anybody takes what Trump says seriously at this point. He’ll say one thing than another, it literally changes day to day. What matters is that the US is exhausted now. They just lost a major war against Iran, their weapons stocks are depleted, and China has them by the balls. So, Trump is doing a bit of posturing right now, but it’s not going to translate into anything material because the coffers are empty.

As we expected, Bibi won't allow the war to end, as that would mean the end of his career. Negotiations have broken down.

And I can’t see Russia taking out the bridges because it’s almost certain they plan to use them. The goal of the Europeans is to provoke a big reaction right now so they can rally their public. The support for the war is at all time low in Europe right now, so they’re trying to put pressure on Putin to do something big to start scaring people how Russians are coming for them.

They started destroying bridges across the Dnieper in the south. Where supplies come from Romania.

They turned on our hot water. Just so you understand, before the war, we never had hot water in the summer. The last time we had hot water in the summer was under the USSR. I still don't understand how they do it. By the way, they bombed Thermal Power Plant 5 again yesterday, and the lights were flickering.

The support for the war is at all time low in Europe right now, so they’re trying to put pressure on Putin to do something big to start scaring people how Russians are coming for them.

Yes, there's a massive propaganda campaign on TV, along with strikes deep into Russia. Yes, it's putting pressure on ordinary people in Russia. This will continue for several more months.

By the way, let's get back to our long-suffering sheep.

A Chinese proposal for interceptor drones for the Ukrainian Armed Forces has leaked online. These aren't even dual-use items anymore. And you're saying someone's going to run out of something...)))) If it all goes wrong, the Chinese will help...)))))

This infuriates me so much, Comrade!

China is so mired in this capitalist shambles, where profit is king, that it's disgusting to watch.

And China won't sever relations with the US, just as the US won't sever relations with China. Too much is tied to it, involving enormous mutual risks.

The US is imposing tariffs on Chinese goods. No, China isn't offended by stopping supplying these goods; China is circumventing the sanctions by reselling the goods to the US through Mexico.

Artemov explains everything correctly, and reading his book really helped me see how American propaganda machine works a lot more clearly. The direct inspiration from the nazis and the evolution of the narrative was very interesting to read about as well.

This vile lie was exposed back in the USSR. Then the USSR collapsed, and we were forced to believe this nonsense again!!!

I think Stalin was largely correct in what he did, the problem was that he left a system which failed to ensure strong leadership going forward. A stable social system can’t depend on a single strong willed individual being in charge and making the right calls. Continuity of competent governance, especially in time of plenty is the hardest problem to solve in my opinion.

Yes, this is something Mao did better than Stalin.

I think the reason is that Stalin was much more powerful than his comrades; everything rested on that, on Stalin's authority. As soon as Stalin was gone, intra-party squabbling began. Everyone was trying to take over. No one was found who could replace Stalin and continue his work. Stalin's legacy was simply squandered!

Also, don’t know if you saw, but American media has now realized DPRK is doing rather well. https://archive.ph/b9zrS

Yes, I recently discussed this with a Marxist friend of ours here.

For me, if the Wall Street Journal writes something like this, there's something fishy about it.))))

Just recently they wrote that Kim is machine-gunning his opponents..... )))

oh and just ran across this https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/...

We definitely need to show this to our Chinese comrade... )))

Yes, I see, the trade turnover between the US and China alone is $700 billion.

The US is dearer to China's heart than Russia... )))

Ten times more.

In fact: It turns out that China is much more dependent on the US than on Russia.

If you recall the economic crisis of 2008, China experienced it more painfully than the US.

This is what distinguishes China from the USSR, because the USSR wasn't nearly as dependent on the West as China. No one could threaten the USSR with sanctions and the like, because it was all pointless! There was no such dependence on microchips from Taiwan. You have to admit, if China doesn't have microchips from Taiwan, they won't be able to produce competitive products. As far as I know, China doesn't have such technology yet, because Taiwan has American technology.

I don’t think the crisis has been averted. It’s going to take a long time before energy prices get back to normal because restarting production can’t happen overnight. Just clearing the backlog of tankers in the gulf is going to take over a year. I also don’t see Israel stopping attacking Lebanon which means the fighting is likely to restart soon.

Trump wants to get out desperately, but he has no way out because Israel won’t play along. From Russian perspective it makes sense to play along though because it drives Europeans up the wall. And I don’t see what leverage he has left either.

Based on the results of the G7 forum, we see that everything is repeating itself again. Trump has once again been talked into a false sense of security by the European ghouls, along with Zelensky. And all of this is precisely connected to the strikes deep into Russia.

Trump has once again sided with Ukraine, and the narrative that Russia must leave the occupied territories has also begun to be heard again. Trump no longer wants peace.

Moscow was bombed again today; this will become a frequent occurrence. The drones that strike Russia using artificial intelligence are American Hornet drones, which the US is testing in Ukraine. Yesterday, such a drone hit a bus carrying Belarusian children who were on their way to the Black Sea for a vacation.

Regarding fuel, every country has reserves, and until these reserves are replenished, the price of oil will not fall. Yes, the price of oil will remain high for some time. That is, if the agreement is signed. Let's wait until Friday.

And completely agree that strikes just serve to remind people in Russia why the war is necessary.

Right now, everyone in Russia is demanding radical measures from Putin. It's understandable: Everyone's talking about bridges across the Dnieper. They're very upset that this hasn't been done yet. This is what I see in Russian chats and war-related public groups. You understand that after the latest strikes on Moscow, the demands will become louder. No one could have imagined that the war would reach Moscow.

It does look like Russia is ramping up deep strike

In any case, the blows will be uneven, with the exception of the bridges across the Dnieper.

Russia will have to endure.

I saw a video just yesterday of some kid beating up TCK cause they took his dad. Yes, public is definitely starting to turn on them.

There's a new trend now: a grandfather with a shovel)))

But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a recent incident in Kyiv where several hundred people confronted the TCC and the police. The police and the TCC fled. This is the first such mass incident in Kyiv.

He's a very interesting author; I've never heard of him.

His books are still very relevant today.

https://publ.lib.ru/...

We disagree on what constitutes socialism.

Yes, I base my argument on the Soviet model, while you base yours on the Chinese one.

The prevailing view is that the Chinese model is superior because it survived.

This leads us to a simple conclusion: there were things Mao managed to do that Stalin did not—actions that ultimately prevented the system's collapse.

Mao built a rigid vertical power structure that has withstood Western attacks to this day; China held firm thanks to the foundations Mao laid.

In that sense, it is already not a predator.

Let’s break it down.

The fact is, the USSR did not engage in classic private foreign direct investment (FDI) because it lacked a market economy. Instead, it implemented large-scale state programs of economic and technical assistance. The USSR signed agreements with 37 countries and built around 600 industrial, energy, and infrastructure facilities.

That is what foreign economic relations between the USSR and other countries looked like—taking Africa as an example.

African nations did not pay in cash; instead, they used a barter system, supplying the USSR with goods produced in Africa that were unavailable in the Soviet Union. Similar economic arrangements existed with Cuba and the Warsaw Pact countries. Settlements were calculated using a notional unit of account.

Furthermore, the USSR exported socialism to each of these countries and subsequently provided unwavering support for that political system.

As for China: in my view, as long as capitalism remains a factor in foreign economic relations, that "aquarium" will be teeming with sharks! And it goes without saying—it is a rhetorical question—that those sharks couldn't care less about socialism.

It is well on the socialist road, and while it has capitalists, they do not form a coherent political body.

I know you're an optimist, Comrade—I'm not arguing with you!

I’m referring to someone whose own pessimism causes them to see negativity where there is no actual basis for it.

Yes, you described that guy accurately. And that’s hardly surprising, because in this world, he has no choice but to be a sociopath.

As for the idea that I might be talking nonsense—that’s unlikely; I have far too much practical life experience to spout complete rubbish. I’ve clawed my way to the top three times in my life, only to hit rock bottom again. Right now, I’m at the bottom once more. Would you be an optimist if you were in my shoes, Comrade? ... ))) And please, don’t tell me that I’m the one to blame for it all, rather than the way life is set up!

I am an optimist, a revolutionary optimist.

You just got lucky, Comrade! I'm happy for you.

I was just like that once, too.

I have to hold onto hope to move forward, and do my best to temper that with sober and grounded analysis.

Yes, it's Dostoevsky: The most terrible thing is when a person has nowhere to go. This quote reflects one of Fyodor Dostoevsky's most haunting themes: the crushing despair of total alienation and the human necessity for purpose.

I very often fill gaps in my theoretical knowledge with personal experience—please forgive me for that!

I would also like to note that the interpretation of Marx's theory in the USSR was somewhat simplified. For instance, the USSR acknowledged the existence of a primitive communal system but not the "Asiatic mode of production." I only heard about the latter recently. I would like to highlight this aspect; perhaps the key to what is currently happening in China lies there.

Given that my knowledge of Marx's theory is superficial—and considering that Marx did not outline a precise model for constructing socialism (his work was largely a theoretical analysis of capitalism and its consequences)—it is worth noting that philosophy never sets concrete tasks for the individual.

Regarding your view of Marx's philosophy, I can also point out an inaccuracy. You state that Marx envisioned the construction of socialism only within the context of developed capitalism, based on highly advanced productive forces.

However, that is not entirely the case. In a letter to Vera Zasulich (dated March 8, 1881),

https://ru.wikipedia.org/...

Karl Marx stated that Russia could bypass the painful stage of capitalism. He emphasized that his theory was not a universal historical prescription and that the Russian peasant commune could, under certain conditions, become the nucleus of socialist development. Marx told Zasulich at the time that education was one of the most crucial factors in the possibility of bypassing the agonizing stage of capitalism.

The bottom line is this: Lenin and Trotsky supported the NEP, whereas Stalin sided with "Zasulich." Stalin turned out to be entirely right, and he did not deviate from Marx's theory by even a millimeter.

We talked about this before, lack of a good selection process that allowed people of low competence to get into positions of power and created a bureaucracy which was largely concerned with preserving itself rather than solving problems was the ultimate cause of the decline.

For some reason, I am convinced that Stalin would have sorted the situation out in a couple of years—it would have become 1937 all over again. Of course, for a long time afterward, people would have talked about how cruel Stalin was...

In essence, the situation in 1987 was the same as in 1937, when the Trotskyists crawled out into the open. And Trotskyists are essentially the same as kulaks and petty property owners.

By the way, I’d like to challenge your point about whether, according to Marx, a transition from feudalism to socialism is possible while bypassing the "agonies of capitalism."

Yes, in his letter to Vera Zasulich dated March 8, 1881, Karl Marx did indeed allow for the possibility that Russia could transition to socialism by relying on its pre-capitalist institutions, thereby bypassing the capitalist stage.

Marx analyzed the socio-economic situation and concluded that the Russian rural commune (specifically the land-holding commune) could serve as a foothold for social renewal.

https://revarchiv.narod.ru/...

Therefore, Stalin acted precisely in accordance with Stalin's own theory—the NEP in Russia could have been dispensed with! Both Marx and Stalin turned out to be right.

I wonder what Marx would have said about the possibility of building socialism in China. Although I’d ​​probably agree with you: China lacked the necessary foundation to skip over the NEP stage.

China was incredibly backward after the Opium Wars.

Look how great Europeans are living, look how much faster things develop under capitalism.

Trump has finally stirred into action, wanting to make America the way it was 40 years ago, but it is already too late. While Europe and the US were fleecing their own people and dismantling their industries, China was building. We see the result: there is no turning back.

Yup, that cartoon is ever green, and just as true as the day it was made.

Back then, they were just pictures to me; I didn't take them seriously. But when events started unfolding in Ukraine... can you imagine? I immediately remembered those cartoons—and the scales fell from my eyes.

Exactly, there were just not thoughts people had back in USSR. It’s destruction was the biggest crime of the 20th century.

It’s all down to modern capitalist culture—a lifestyle where everyone is chasing profits and all sorts of sordid amusements. Drugs have also had a massive impact; they’ve poisoned all of Europe and the US. Wherever there are drugs, there is perversion. That’s exactly where that flood of "jolly guys" came from—the ones whose rights I’m suddenly supposed to care about. It’s all the drugs, I assure you!

You know yourself that the whole high-society crowd is hooked on cocaine. It’s very fashionable among them.

I really can’t see how relations with Europe could be restored at this point. There would have to be a revolution in Europe before that happens.

Yes, I agree; the EU looks relatively united right now. Trump has backed down, the global fuel crisis has been averted, and while there will be complications, they won't be critical—unless Bibi sticks his long nose in again. Because, it seems to me, if the war ends, Netanyahu will be ousted. For him, just as for Zelensky, the end of the war spells political death.

And Trump has finally realized he can't break Iran.

Trump is shifting his focus back to Ukraine. That "dynamic duo" will be heading to Moscow again.

I don't get it—isn't Putin tired of this? Flirting with Trump again, sending warm birthday wishes... The circus act is starting all over again. After his setback with Iran, Trump needs to do something before autumn: either secure peace in Ukraine, attack Cuba, or something similar. I think he’s lost his appetite for war after that last incident, so he’ll opt for "peace" in Ukraine. What leverage he’ll use this time, though, is unclear to me.

The G7 summit is taking place today, and—as always—Ukraine has crossed yet another red line. There was a massive strike on Moscow. This is bound to happen regularly from now on; things will only escalate.

Yes, given the unfavorable situation at the front, Ukraine has little choice but to resort to deep-strike attacks and terrorism as a countermeasure. However, this is unlikely to affect the actual frontline; it is aimed at the civilian population to sow fear and create hardships—financial and otherwise. That said, I believe Russia has been preparing for this since winter, back when the blocking of social media platforms began.

I suspect Putin won't make any rash moves right now; he has made it clear that he is banking on developments on the ground—at the front. We shall see; perhaps he knows something more.

They openly stated that they’re going to be shuffling Syrsky out by fall, and it’s clear the directive is coming from the US. It could be that Americans are hoping to transition to something like Chechnya soon.

If we’re talking about Chechnya, it probably would have been better to make Budanov president and install a military government.

By the way, there has been a noticeable rise in public opposition to the TCK [military recruitment offices] recently. Something will have to be done about this in the foreseeable future, too. Incidents of mobs beating up TCK officers have become more frequent. I’m not saying this will necessarily lead to an uprising anytime soon, though. It’s just that TCK officers feel very uncomfortable in the city because everyone hates them—both Western and Eastern Ukrainians. It turns out that a common enemy unites both the "Banderites" and the Russian-speaking population of southeastern Ukraine. You can see it all on social media here. There is growing hatred directed at both Zelensky and the TCK. Even those who want Ukraine to win have come to hate Zelensky and the TCK. It’s like a parallel reality here. Everyone here—the ones with "pots on their heads"

https://youtu.be/H2Pratb_TNw?t=52

—seems to have developed bipolar disorder.

I used to say that being American isn't a nationality, but a diagnosis—back when I listened to American politicians or watched CNN. It was nothing but contradictions. Now I see the same thing happening with Ukrainians. I’ve now fully realized from personal experience what American propaganda is all about.

If you dig deeper, it’s not even just American propaganda; it’s Goebbels-style propaganda—the kind that turns people not only into schizophrenics but also into cruel, ruthless individuals.

Greetings, Comrade!

I would also like to offer a slight clarification: not "oligarchs," but the bourgeoisie; not "workers," but the proletariat. That is, if we are following Lenin.

Do not forget that, under a capitalist system, the proletariat consists not only of workers and peasants but also of the intelligentsia—doctors, teachers, researchers, engineers, and the like.

The middle class, too, is for the most part part of the proletariat.

The bourgeoisie, meanwhile, enriches itself through "surplus value." Were it not for this surplus value, then—firstly—all goods would be twice a scheaper, and—secondly—all global financial institutions would be abolished as unnecessary.

Careful about stuff like this.

We are not speaking of liberalism; we are speaking of the bourgeoisie, which is a parasite on society.

How do you make sense of people whose labour is the primary source of their income and who also have a material interest in the maintenance of private property, such as home-owning middle-class people.

As I understand it—judging by the name of this community—we are discussing socialism.

Under socialism, there is no middle class. In the USSR, a manual laborer earned a higher salary than an engineer or a doctor—unless, of course, the latter was a professor.

If a worker performed their job well, they received an apartment free of charge.

As for what you are writing about socialism—viewing it through the prism of capitalist terminology—it strikes me as, at the very least, both strange and incomprehensible.

and anarchist scholarship

In my view, this is largely utopian—which is probably why Lenin abolished the party. That said, I do like Kropotkin’s ideas; in a certain sense, they resonate with the principles of socialism.

who also have a material interest in the maintenance of private property, such as home-owning middle-class people.

Vladimir Lenin regarded private ownership of the means of production—land, factories, and plants—as the primary source of exploitation and social inequality. He was convinced that it had to be abolished and transferred into the hands of the state (as public ownership) in order to build a classless socialist society.

Lenin and not Lukács if they’re so into Leninism? Have you ever asked yourself that?

Google just came to my rescue—I had absolutely no idea who Lukács was.

"György (Georg) Lukács was not studied in the USSR as an independent thinker due to his affiliation with 'Western Marxism,' his departure from the dogmas of Soviet historical materialism, and his open criticism of Stalinism. His ideas were considered dangerous to the established Soviet ideological doctrine."

Do you understand now that socialism in the West and socialism in the USSR are two entirely different things?

On that note, I’d recommend that you not take the writing of a white man from over 100 years ago as your only understanding of socialist

I know you won't read my reply, but I'll answer anyway: it's very simple. Lenin is the only person in history who successfully implemented socialism in practice—there is no one else like him. Stalin was Lenin's successor.

Lenin and not Lukács

I studied Lenin in school.

I haven't read Lukács. He wasn't popular here. Back then, people here were still studying Marx and Engels.

Dictatorship of the proletariat

Capitalism is defined by private ownership of businesses.

There is another name for this: private ownership of the means of production.

The means of production constitute the aggregate of all material resources used to create goods and services. They comprise two main components: the instruments of labor (the tools and machinery used to work) and the subjects of labor (the raw materials and inputs worked upon).

This concept also encompasses wage labor. Under socialism, a private individual is not permitted to hire another person for employment.

However, during the Stalin era, private enterprise did, in fact, exist. These took the form of artels—small workshops, typically employing up to ten people, that manufactured light industrial goods. There were tens of thousands of such artels across the USSR. Yet, within these artels, both the workers and the managers participated on equal terms; specifically, the director of the artel was re-elected annually by the collective membership. Artels in the USSR produced items such as radio receivers, televisions, children's toys, and similar goods.

Most socialists I engage with are interested in **pragmatic action **

Are they keen on thinking about private property and "the fundamental issue of private property from attention?"

Am I understanding you correctly?

"fictional character, typically in a fantasy world, with others; like Dungeons and Dragons."

I already mentioned that I am not a native English speaker. I don't know what "in a fantasy world, with others; like Dungeons and Dragons" means.

" in the lack of real engagement with socialist scholarship and ideas"

Then again, I don't understand what—in your view, or in the opinion of your socialist friends—constitutes "socialist scholarship and ideas." I would be very interested to hear this, particularly as someone who lived under actual socialism and remembers perfectly well what it is and what it looks like in practice.